< 1 2 3 4 5 > 
 
   
 

Sam is not enough

 
zelzo
 
Avatar
 
 
zelzo
Total Posts:  2029
Joined  20-12-2007
 
 
 
01 June 2009 19:15
 

Bad Rabbit
Because of this I’d say that the time for conversational intolerance is long past and that we should treat the faithful like we treat the Ebola virus, with zero tolerance so we can destroy this self-destructive meme with extreme prejudice.

(Andrew):  I agree with this (Skipshot).  Playing nice to theists is not the way to reduce their morbid influence.  It just makes them bolder.


Using reason to display a theist’s inability to think clearly is fine.  Anything that is hostile and violent (metaphorically or literally) is unsound and a poor way to communicate.

Lindajean

[ Edited: 01 June 2009 19:24 by zelzo]
 
 
Andrew
 
Avatar
 
 
Andrew
Total Posts:  9231
Joined  15-06-2006
 
 
 
01 June 2009 19:26
 
zelzo - 01 June 2009 05:15 PM

Bad Rabbit
Because of this I’d say that the time for conversational intolerance is long past and that we should treat the faithful like we treat the Ebola virus, with zero tolerance so we can destroy this self-destructive meme with extreme prejudice.

(Andrew):  I agree with this (Skipshot).  Playing nice to theists is not the way to reduce their morbid influence.  It just makes them bolder.

So what exactly are you speaking of here?  Destroying with extreme prejudice is ambiguous what are you advocating? 

Andrew, what does “not playing nice” mean as well?

It is one thing to call a spade a spade (Sam’s approach) and to confront theists with reason, but the tone in this thread sounds metaphorically violent and aggressive.

Lindajean

(Andrew):  Aggresive, sure.  Violent?  I don’t see that.

I don’t understand this question:

Andrew, what does “not playing nice” mean as well?

Could you rephrase it?

Nice to see you here!

 
 
Andrew
 
Avatar
 
 
Andrew
Total Posts:  9231
Joined  15-06-2006
 
 
 
01 June 2009 19:29
 
zelzo - 01 June 2009 05:15 PM

Bad Rabbit
Because of this I’d say that the time for conversational intolerance is long past and that we should treat the faithful like we treat the Ebola virus, with zero tolerance so we can destroy this self-destructive meme with extreme prejudice.

(Andrew):  I agree with this (Skipshot).  Playing nice to theists is not the way to reduce their morbid influence.  It just makes them bolder.


Using reason to display a theist’s inability to think clearly is fine.

(Andrew):  Reason is wasted on a theist.  So is hostility, for that matter.

 
 
zelzo
 
Avatar
 
 
zelzo
Total Posts:  2029
Joined  20-12-2007
 
 
 
01 June 2009 20:34
 

(Andrew):  Aggresive, sure.  Violent?  I don’t see that.

We can say that Operation Rescue is an “aggressive” approach to stop abortion. Taken to the extreme it turns into “violence” and abortion doctors get murdered.  So I get in the gray when people talk about “destroying” something with “extreme prejudice” (which is what BR stated.)  I don’t know how you destroy using “extreme prejudice”  without using violence and aggression.  I know BR is being metaphorical and he isn’t advocating actual violence against theists (and neither are you) but the point I am making here is that some people make the jump from metaphor to literal very easily. And people end up physically hurt or dead or intimidated.

 

You claim that “playing nice” doesn’t work and I take that to mean “not playing nice” does, but maybe I am not really understanding what you mean.  Assuming (and I admit this is my assumption I am drawing from your statement) that playing nice doesn’t work, then what would be the alternative of playing nice be?

I don’t understand this question:
Andrew, what does “not playing nice” mean as well?
Could you rephrase it?

I tried to above. If playing nice doesn’t work then what are you advocating if anything at all?

 
 
zelzo
 
Avatar
 
 
zelzo
Total Posts:  2029
Joined  20-12-2007
 
 
 
01 June 2009 20:37
 

(Andrew):  Reason is wasted on a theist.  So is hostility, for that matter.

I don’t think reason is ever wasted. Hostility, however, always is.

Lindajean

 
 
eudemonia
 
Avatar
 
 
eudemonia
Total Posts:  9031
Joined  05-04-2008
 
 
 
01 June 2009 20:51
 

One person’s reason is just another person’s blasphemy or ignorance. Just ask them. Or us! mad

What a never ending frustrating struggle.

 
 
zelzo
 
Avatar
 
 
zelzo
Total Posts:  2029
Joined  20-12-2007
 
 
 
01 June 2009 21:12
 

Andrew

Nice to see you here!

Thanks, Andrew. It’s nice to see you here too.

LJ

 
 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  10059
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
01 June 2009 21:16
 

Violence?  That word never came up, please don’t put words in our mouths.  However, you have a point that aggressiveness is known to spawn violence, but the holy books haven’t stopped the Jews, Christians, or Muslims from beating each other to a pulp.  Religion is unique in the realm of ideas in promoting violence when it is challenged.

Allow me to clarify my point in agreeing with Bad Rabbit.  I meant intolerance in the sense that science does.  Science challenges its ideas constantly and vehemently and bad ideas are quickly discarded.  Religion is alone in its declaration that it cannot be challenged or insulted, and this is what I want blown to smithereens.

[ Edited: 01 June 2009 21:22 by Skipshot]
 
zelzo
 
Avatar
 
 
zelzo
Total Posts:  2029
Joined  20-12-2007
 
 
 
01 June 2009 21:18
 
eudemonia - 01 June 2009 06:51 PM

One person’s reason is just another person’s blasphemy or ignorance. Just ask them. Or us! mad

What a never ending frustrating struggle.


I think we can use the word “reason” as a means of deduction and logical thinking to seek out understanding of the world and knowledge vs believing something on faith. That’s why this forum is called “The Reason Project” and not “The Faith Project.”  But I get your idea….one man’s garbage is another man’s treasure kind of thingy. 

Anyway, my point to Andrew is that reason(ing) in the classical sense is never a waste of time because, really what else do we have?

Lindajean

 
 
zelzo
 
Avatar
 
 
zelzo
Total Posts:  2029
Joined  20-12-2007
 
 
 
01 June 2009 21:22
 
Skipshot - 01 June 2009 07:16 PM

Violence?  That word never came up, please don’t put words in our mouths.  However, you have a point that aggressiveness is known to spawn violence, but the holy books hasn’t stopped the Jews, Christians, or Muslims from beating each other to a pulp.  Religion is unique in the realm of ideas in promoting violence when it is challenged.

Allow me to clarify my point in agreeing with Bad Rabbit.  I meant intolerance in the sense that science does.  Science challenges its ideas constantly and vehemently and bad ideas are quickly discarded.  Religion is alone in its declaration that it cannot be challenged or insulted, and this is what I want blown to smithereens.


Good job. I seek out clarification on this forum, so thank you. I didn’t mean to put words in your mouth so an apology. I was simply expressing my train of thought….and asking some rhetorical questions.

 
 
Andrew
 
Avatar
 
 
Andrew
Total Posts:  9231
Joined  15-06-2006
 
 
 
01 June 2009 22:35
 
zelzo - 01 June 2009 06:34 PM

You claim that “playing nice” doesn’t work and I take that to mean “not playing nice” does, but maybe I am not really understanding what you mean.

(Andrew):  I have no idea what, if anything, would be effective in reducing the influence of religion.  But I know from long experience that being pleasant (yes I can!) and trying to reason with the virtuous isn’t.  Effective.

 
 
Andrew
 
Avatar
 
 
Andrew
Total Posts:  9231
Joined  15-06-2006
 
 
 
01 June 2009 22:36
 
zelzo - 01 June 2009 06:37 PM

(Andrew):  Reason is wasted on a theist.  So is hostility, for that matter.

I don’t think reason is ever wasted.

(Andrew):  You’ve obviously never tried to reason with a Daschound. 
grin

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  18127
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
02 June 2009 00:14
 
zelzo - 01 June 2009 05:05 PM
GAD - 25 May 2009 01:57 AM

The OP reminded of one of my favorite vids: for those who haven’t seen it, you must!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDp7pkEcJVQ

That was excellent, Gad.

Lindajean

Glad you enjoyed! So what’s up with the new name?

 
 
zelzo
 
Avatar
 
 
zelzo
Total Posts:  2029
Joined  20-12-2007
 
 
 
02 June 2009 12:07
 

GAD

Glad you enjoyed! So what’s up with the new name?

I like it.

LJ

 
 
NomoNOMA
 
Avatar
 
 
NomoNOMA
Total Posts:  25
Joined  12-05-2009
 
 
 
02 June 2009 12:26
 

Late to this thread.  While I appreciate Rabbit’s unrelenting diatribe (and I like your caustic/funny style and you must be very enlightened to quote Pulp Fiction so fluently grin ), I do think that the armor-girded-loins, take-no-prisoners, scorched-Earth full frontal assault method will fail.  As Dawkins has said, it is the fencesitters not the fundies who are open to logical suggestion and ultimately a loss of faith.  Your anti-healing post, while personally therapeutic I’m sure, accomplished what exactly?

There’s something to be learned from the case study of the fundie-turned atheist.  In general it is not posts such as yours that lifted them to our side but the millstone of reason that slowly and constrantly ground down their personal wishful thinking.  Sam’s conversational intolerance approach will convert lots of people because we have data to support us (they don’t) and the change in the zeitgeist will further erode Christian confidence as their friends and neighbors evolve into fencesitters.  In the last 20 years, we’ve grown our numbers considerably.

I don’t know how far atheism can go.  Our real enemy, in my opinion, is ignorance and stupidity—not religion specifically, but an inability to even follow logic, argument, science.  Religion (alternative medicine, crystal power, etc) is all just bullshit that appeals to undereducated people who have little desire or will to educate themselves or learn the truth.  Goddidit is such an easy fallback position of ignorance and childhood indoctrination always helps.

 
 
 < 1 2 3 4 5 >